The Debating Society
Hobbies & Interests
A place where ModDB members can debate civilly, and learn from each other's views.
Irony and the Left (part 2)
(view original)
Post a comment
A place where ModDB members can debate civilly, and learn from each other's views.
Had a issue on the last page where after reaching a certain length wasn't getting a page two option and comments were disappearing (error with the system I guess?). Feel free to quote responses from the last page and continue here.
@Necrolifer
BLM seems uh, indisposed at the moment going mental over Trump winning.
Will be fine in avoiding wars, it's the social stresses I'm concerned about.
What's the politics like over in your country?
Haha,yeah they must be crying over it in unison.
About the politics - ****!
It's too bad that a country as beautiful and scenic as Romania has become the playground of morally corrupt and money hungry politicians,but have no worries,they'll eventually get what's coming to 'em. Romania used to have a reputation,but now it's gone,and all because of the retards who govern this country.
I'll probably miss Obama's accent. He really talked like an american,but did he really act like one?
I'll give Obama this, while I did and still do disagree with many of his policies, he was a calm man. Collected and on point when he had something to say.
Hollywoodreporter.com
That was one of the moments I respected him most.
I just wish he held the same kinda respect to law enforcement and called out black lives matter for their absolutely childish behavior.
Just read something about your countries corruption problem. "Bulgaria has the highest perceived corruption among the 28 EU countries, while Romania is third worst, just ahead of Italy, according to the latest Corruption Perceptions Index by Transparency International. But unlike Bulgaria, Romania is inching lower on the list."
If you wanna go into detail over what they've been doing over there feel free. Take my mind off all the nuttiness we got going on back here.
Edit: Good thing I'm familiar with Moddb doing this, otherwise I might not have had a copy of my comment. Would not have written it again xD
______________
"just rushing legislation through without even asking us what we thought could use revision in it to begin with."
Oh please, like Trump and the Republican are gonna ask the Democrats about anything now that they have the majority in both the Senate and Congress. The Republican party haven't, and won't, be anymore saints that you believe the Democrats to be.
"Probably because the policies he was initiating weren't going to work to begin with? Why would they support something doomed to fail? Take Obamacare for example."
They did work, not perfectly, but they did work. While there are certainly things to be changed and improved about it. Tell the over 20 million people, who couldn't afford insurance before, that it didn't work. And after that tell them to go **** themselves because is their own fault they can't afford the overpriced medicine that's being sold. Because all those people, especially the liberals are; "lazy people who has never worked a day in their lives. Am'rite murica?". And you guys say the liberals are the only ones to stereotype. But I'm sure you have proof, some statistics from PragerU maybe? Lol
"You have any idea how many pages were in that law and it was passed anyway without being read and understood?"
Oh sure, nobody read it. If nobody had read it, how could they disagree with it? Even before Obamacare was written, the Republicans were outraged. So if they out of spite chose not to read it, then its their own damn fault. Its a BS excuse if I ever heard one.
"maybe that's because their objections held actual merit?"
How could they object to it if they never read it!?! Omg. Sure they could with 20/20 hindsight, btu they have been "objecting" to it since before Obama was elected.
"Really? Internet isn't just absorbing, it's telling. That's the key difference you're ignoring here. I can not only respond to propaganda with internet, I can counter it anywhere in the world. Welcome to info wars."
I'm not ignoring anything. The problem with the internet is that its biased towards EVERYTHING. I don't know about in America, but in Danish schools internet sources are typically frowned upon because they are either very biased, or severely lacking in their own sources. This US election have been a good example of that if you really want to find facts that support your perspective you will. The problem with these facts are that they are most often taken out of context and out into one that serves ones own narrative.
On election day, a guy told me on skype, that he heard Hillary wanted raise the abortion limit up till birth and maybe after... That was one of his reasons for not voting for her. That's not even the worst or most popular conspiracy theory out there. And don't get me wrong, there are plenty of reasons not to vote for Clinton, but there is so much nonsense out there that too many people on both sides believe.
"Uh huh, and that's what we're looking to back away from."
"Not because of how we project power to others. I'm tired of wars over regime changes and sick of conflicts over political gravitas."
Then why do you need a bigger military if you're not gonna use it? The USA can effectively defend itself against any threat in the world with its Navy alone more or less.
The thing is, eventually a military have to justify its own cost.
"He's been critical of the Syria conflict, and likewise wants good relations with Russia. Contrary to the policies of those like Obama who kept us in Iraq and Afghanistan, put us in Syria and Libya, and then started fights with Russia resulting in Crimea."
Enough with the Russia thing, neither Obama nor Hillary actually wants war with Russia. Just because they don't want to put up with Russian BS. Then again, that's easy for the American to say, when was the last time a Russian Bomber aircraft violated US air space? Oh? Never? Well as a member of one of those little countries that Russian loves to **** on, who has to spend money on sending expensive jets up to escort them out every time, I'm firmly with Obama and the rest of the EU in terms of standing up to Russian power projection.
Those bombers fly in international airspace, the funny thing is that you spend that money scrambling jets to intercept them... Even better, majority of the time they're Tu-142s, literally feasting on the radar data/IFF and response times stronk NATO employs. Typical bureaucratic incompetence, willing to sacrifice potentially game changing data just for a show of "look we can intercept those evil Ruskies!!1!".
Russia's strategic nuclear flights resumed after a good 10 years of sitting idle. 10 years of the US continuing to probe Russian airspace with their own strategic air arm with no clear reason other than to **** them off... Don't like the Bears? Then tell the Stratofortesses to go home. Youtube.com
Give me good evidence of Russia ******* on Denmark by the way. I'm all ears.
"Even better, majority of the time they're Tu-142s, literally feasting on the radar data/IFF and response times stronk NATO employs. Typical bureaucratic incompetence, willing to sacrifice potentially game changing data just for a show of "look we can intercept those evil Ruskies!!1!"."
We would have intercepted them even if we weren't part of NATO, totally irrelevant to what I'm trying to say.
December 2014 springs to mind. A Russia jet almost had collision with a civilian aircraft after it took off from the airport in Copenhagen. When we, along with Sweden contacted the Russians, politely asking them to keep their transponders on in civilian airspace. They basically deflected the issue unto NATO, which is again, irrelevant to what we were asking at the time.
Don't get me wrong, I get that they have to challenge NATO, for a multitude of reasons. But they can do that without being ******** about it, or at least be ******** to the Americans instead of us.
Anyway, this is not at all the debate I'm interested in having. So I'll end it there.
So I guess Trump talking to Obama and reconsidering throwing out the entirety of Obamacare is to be taken as "not listening?"
Cnn.com
"It's more than poetic justice that insurance companies are now complaining about losing money at a rapid rate on the Obamacare exchanges. It is a reckoning for their shameless promotion of a federal program that promised so much and delivered so little.
They were promised a trillion dollars in new business from customers forced to buy their product. And now, they face ruinous losses as the promised "young and healthy" customers have not materialized. And next year, the insurance companies will go hat in hand to state regulators and beg for massive premium increases just to keep the Obamacare exchanges afloat."
Does that sound affordable to you?
"Wait. It gets worse. Those who have managed to browse the marketplace have often been hit by sticker shock. Take Adam Weldzius, a nurse practitioner and single father from Carpentersville. He sought the same level of coverage on the exchange as he and his 7-year-old daughter have now, with the same insurer and the same network of doctors and hospitals. At best, Weldzius found, his monthly premium of $233 would more than double. If he chose a plan priced at the same level, the annual deductible would be $12,700, more than three times his current $3,500 deductible.
Last spring, President Barack Obama said "there will still be, you know, glitches and bumps" in the rollout of the new system. But what we're seeing now is no glitch or bump. There is a growing mountain of evidence that Obamacare has fundamental problems in design and implementation."
Poor execution, due to a law that wasn't even properly read.
"Not long after the Justice Department blocked Aetna's merger with Humana, the company announced it would be scaling back participation in Affordable Care Act exchanges. Now, Obamacare consumers in 11 states won't be able to keep their insurance, even though, one imagines, they like their plans. But choices are getting scarcer by the year. Aetna is now one of about a dozen major insurance providers that have dropped completely out or scaled back participation in exchanges.
A recent Kaiser Family Foundation study estimates that 664 counties will only feature one single insurer on Obamacare exchanges in 2017. In 2016, it was 225. Four entire states will have only one Obamacare insurer."
Sounds like there will be less health insurance options...
Sources?
Realclearpolitics.com
Pjmedia.com
Articles.chicagotribune.com
It's a 2700 page bill son.
I'll just go ahead and give you a nugget.
Gop.com
The Evidence:
1. Increases Health Care Costs
2. Causes Insurance Premiums To Rise
3. Hurts Quality Of Health Care
4. Nearly $570 Billion In Tax Hikes
5. Adds Over $500 Billion To The Debt
Each of those points is addressed in detail in the link.
This is true, but it's also true one can go take a side of the story from anywhere to try and build a greater understanding of the topic at hand. Why do you think I spend so much time debating?
I can agree with that.
This is true, however we have a country with a cultural mindset to go gung ho over our military. That can change, but it will take time. And right now the country feels insecure with itself.
I wish that were true but we were just recently at Defcon 3 with them and had our allies giving greenlights to shut down Russian aircraft over Syria who are perceived aggressive. Things have been getting worse in Syria and the whole situation needs to calm down.